ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2019
4D Flow MRI Estimation of Boundary Conditions for Patient Specific Cardiovascular Simulation.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Cerebrovascular Hemodynamic Differences in Adults with Sickle Cell Disease: Comparing Stroke and Non-Stroke Cohorts.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Patient-Specific Inverse Modeling of In Vivo Cardiovascular Mechanics with Medical Image-Derived Kinematics as Input Data: Concepts, Methods, and Applications.Applied sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Non-invasive estimation of pulmonary hemodynamics from 2D-PC MRI with an arterial mechanics method.Journal of biomechanics · 2021Article
- A distributed lumped parameter model of blood flow with fluid-structure interaction.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2021Article
- Non-invasive MRI Derived Hemodynamic Simulation to Predict Successful vs. Unsuccessful Catheter Interventions for Branch Pulmonary Artery Stenosis: Proof-of-Concept and Experimental Validation in Swine.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2021Article
- Longitudinal Evolution of Pulmonary Artery Wall Shear Stress in a Swine Model of Pulmonary Artery Stenosis and Stent Interventions.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2021Article
- Enhancement of cerebrovascular 4D flow MRI velocity fields using machine learning and computational fluid dynamics simulation data.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- On the Role and Effects of Uncertainties in CardiovascularFrontiers in medical technology · 2021Article
- Personalized Dosimetry for Liver Cancer Y-90 Radioembolization Using Computational Fluid Dynamics and Monte Carlo Simulation.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate image based cardiovascular simulations require patient specific boundary conditions (BCs) for inlets, outlets and vessel wall mechanical properties. While inlet BCs are typically determined non-invasively, invasive pressure catheterization is often used to determine patient specific outlet BCs and vessel wall mechanical properties. A method using 4D Flow MRI to non-invasively determine both patient specific outlet BCs and vessel wall mechanical properties is presented and results for both in vitro validation with a latex tube and an in vivo pulmonary artery stenosis (PAS) stent intervention are presented. For in vitro validation, acceptable agreement is found between simulation using BCs from 4D Flow MRI and benchtop measurements. For the PAS virtual intervention, simulation correctly predicts flow distribution with 9% error compared to MRI. Using 4D Flow MRI to noninvasively determine patient specific BCs increases the ability to use image based simulations as pressure catheterization is not always performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.